Oh, he does make some compelling arguments — at least for some people.

But Frum counts on the fact that We the People just won’t take the time, nor do we have the sophistication, to figure out what’s really being communicated. He thinks he can hide it (as do others, including the media) through the foggy logic of modern political argumentation that he employs.

Here’s the gist.

The crux of Frum’s argument is this: Cain hasn’t been in politics, so Cain can’t effectively run government.

So many people are put off by the current state of the country, they’ve taken to public demonstrations in big cities across the land. They started in New York and are calling themselves “Occupy Wall Street.”

Like a page out of history, these demonstrations have the mien of some passionate peasant uprising, laying honorable siege to the oppressive nobleman’s castle.

But here’s the rub: Not even they are sure what they want to achieve.

In reality, more than anything, they just want their movement to gain enough steam so they can force everyone to begin a “dialog.” And they want that dialog to begin yesterday. [Continue reading]

Though the rhetoric and spectacle of the most recent Republican presidential debates has died down a bit, it has left me thinking…

In watching the so-called “debates”, one almost gets the sense that a comedy of errors is taking place. Witness some of the following:

Everybody’s sniping.

Michele Bachmann takes on Rick Perry‘s Executive Order mandating that very young girls be immunized against a disease associated with sexual activity. The only problem? It was voted down by the legislature and never took effect.

Or what about Rick Perry looking to smash Mitt Romney over the head with his “He’s been running [for President] for five and a half years” dig? As if. Romney was definitely out of the spotlight for most of that time, notwithstanding an occasional op-ed here and there. Not too egregious, but erroneous nonetheless. [Continue reading]

I don’t know how many of you are following the emerging Solyndra scandal (and I do mean scandal).

National Review Online is reporting the story—complete with links to several previous reports—but for some reason, I haven’t yet heard it break on the major networks. Now that may be because I use CNN as my main source of news. But in any event, much of it appears lost on the world.

My main gripe has to do with how quickly this shows the President began breaking campaign promises after taking office. [Continue reading]

What’s up with the need for having a presidential “spokesman?” (No, I’m not worried about being politically correct—we haven’t yet had a spokeswoman, probably because we haven’t yet had a female president.)

Editor’s note: Much to my chagrin, I’ve been gently reminded that we have had some spokeswomen. Thus my coy attempt at tongue-in-cheek humor fell flat on its face. Thanks to a reader for the correction…

Jay Carney, White House Press Secretary

In the old days you did your own talking. From all I’ve been able to gather, there was never a need for someone else to explain on behalf of a president what they thought on a particular issue—they could do it all by themselves. This was the case with Washington, Adams, Jefferson, and others. I’d like to think they’d find it pretty odd to have someone trying to tell others what their positions were on the problems of the day.

But somewhere along the way (post Abraham Lincoln), President’s began this modern practice of having a Press Secretary. It went along with the new practice of hiring White House staff, the numbers of which have of course grown dramatically over the years. [Continue reading…]

In the spirit of colonial times, I've chosen a pseudonym for my writing--Hamiltonian87. Unlike those times, however, mine's put together in a modern way, not taken directly from a classical figure in western civilization.

While Alexander Hamilton most famously used "Publius" for his writing, I honor the Colonel by using his last name. His energy in persuading on behalf of the new government crafted in 1787 qualifies him for this honor.

I hope my thoughts and interpretations turn out to be compelling and engaging. Please feel free to leave comments as you like—I enjoy a lively discussion—but I would ask that you refrain from flaming, hateful, or profane speech.